[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#821260: RFS: python-adventure/1.4-1 [ITP]



On 19-Apr-2016, Markus Koschany wrote:
> thanks for your update. There are only a few things left before we can
> upload the package.

Thank you for working with me on this.

> My main concern is the adventure-common binary package because I
> don't believe that shipping advent.dat with an extra package is very
> useful at the moment.

Would you decline to upload on that basis? I appreciate you don't
think there's a benefit, but is there any appreciable harm from having
the ‘adventure-common’ package?

> I think it is cool to have a modern Python3 version but it would be
> rather boring to have identical versions that simply reuse the same
> story from advent.dat.

My thinking is that the Python 3 package is rather idiosyncratic, and
that I'd like to make it clear the common files are available for
different ports from the original Fortran program.

I'm not going to insist, but I'd like to know whether you think this
structure is harmful, or only that this isn't the style you would
choose.


> colossal-cave-adventure.desktop: error: (will be fatal in the future):
> value "colossal-cave-adventure.png" for key "Icon" in group "Desktop
> Entry" is an icon name with an extension, but there should be no
> extension as described in the Icon Theme Specification if the value is
> not an absolute path

I didn't see that part of the specification, thank you.

> Please change the Vcs fields […] so that the name of the git
> repository is identical to the source package name

Okay. The name ‘pkg-python-adventure’ was originally chosen because
the repository had only the Debian packaging, like other ‘pkg-foo’
repositories. I will re-name it now that the repository also contains
the upstream code.

> and that we use cgit for better performance.

Recently, the default browser on Alioth was switched to Cgit. So,
at <URL:https://anonscm.debian.org/git/collab-maint/dput.git> the Cgit
browser is presented.

> There is a authoritative list of virtual package names (yeah,
> bureaucracy in Debian is wonderful)
> 
> https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/virtual-package-names-list.txt
> 
> Please follow the procedure outlined in this text file

Great, I didn't know that existed :-) I will follow that procedure.

-- 
 \        “I fly Air Bizarre. You buy a combination one-way round-trip |
  `\    ticket. Leave any Monday, and they bring you back the previous |
_o__)     Friday. That way you still have the weekend.” —Steven Wright |
Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: